United States v. Hinkson’s Empirical Analysis
585 F.3d 1247 · 2009
Citation profile
251 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 739 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder (2013), Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co. (2012)
251 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 628 · 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 115 · 18 U.S.C. § 373 · 18 U.S.C. § 641 (Livestock Fraud Protection Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 704
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Olano · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Younger v. Harris
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 739 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he first step of our abuse of discretion test is to determine de novo whether the trial court identified the correct legal rule to apply to the relief requested. [T]he second step ... is to determine whether the trial court’s application of the correct legal standard was (1) “illogical”, (2) “implausible,” or (3) without “support in inferences that may be drawn from the facts in the record.””
26 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]e first look to whether the trial court identified and applied the correct legal rule to the relief requested. Second, we look to whether the trial court’s resolution of the motion resulted from a factual finding that was illogical, implausible, or without support in inferences that may be drawn from the facts in the record.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f, having given full respect to the jury's findings, the judge on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.